Bettman Returnz
Why so serious?
No. But anyone can be had for the right price.
Dreger: Multiple teams interested in Conor Garland - TOR, BOS, NJD, COL
- Thread starter UrbanImpact
- Start date
What is the next tier up from those prospects? Most of the players mentioned seem to potentially bring one element of Garland's game if everything pans out, and just generally don't seem to be super likely to make an impact in the NHL later. Obviously I'm not asking for Newhook or Byram or anyone, but someone that would be the value of said prospects and a pick together. Cap is fine with me, I just don't see us having a need for someone like Compher, so his inclusion would just be for cap purposes and not used as value for us.
AngryMilkcrates
End of an Era
- Jun 4, 2016
- 17,495
- 28,224
The heck he doesn't!
I happen to think Connor would look fantastic next to Marchand and Bergeron.
Would allow us to keep Pasta with Hall since they have chemistry.
In the long run we need center depth since we have no projected first line centers to replace Bergeron, yet.
But you don't pass on Garland. It's all depending on the price. We have Nhl ready young D to offer, it just is really more about Vancouver liking them or not.
blankall
Registered User
- Jul 4, 2007
- 15,110
- 5,520
If Vancouver is going through a rebuild/retool, why are they trading Podkolzin, who is 20 and looks to be developing nicely. The only time these players get traded is if they demand out or as part of a package for a top line/pairing player. Occasionally a hockey trade occurs.
In any event, the only way Vancouver is moving a player like that is if an equally good d-man prospect is coming back or in a deal for a relatively young top line/pairing player with term/RFA status.
deckercky
Registered User
- Oct 27, 2010
- 9,382
- 2,461
This. Canucks are very happy with Pod, who is exactly the type of piece they want to build around, but technically he is not unavailable. Teams would not like the price of acquisition. In practical terms, it's extremely unlikely that anyone will offer what it takes to get him (the trade would have to start with a prospect considered to be untouchable by the trading team).
This is actually fairly common. Lou Lamoriello, Brian Burke, and Bob Murray do it too.
Okay not the most resounding list of endorsements
Stephen Gionta
Boston College > Boston University
I have the Canucks sending the 2nd because the Devils are taking on Dickinson and his 2.65 million AAV for the next 2 seasons. (6 points in 49 games while playing slightly above average defensively) Not to mention his real salary is actually higher than 2.65 million in both seasons so that carries some weight as well. But the Devils are sending back their 4th rounder. So essentially they are moving up ~ 50 spots in the draft to take on Dickinson for two seasons.
Last 100 games:
Garland - 0.69 points per game
Zacha - 0.61 points per game
The difference in production isn't much, but its the physical and "pest" like element that Garland brings that the Devils are in need of. Which is why the Devils are sending their top RHD prospect in Reilly Walsh to Vancouver in this scenario.
Bettman Returnz
Why so serious?
Please read my comment. No to this deal. Canucks are not sending a good pick. We’d just hang on to Dickinson. Not to mention we don’t really want zacha. You’d have a better basis around Boeser than garland too. So pass.
Szechwan
Registered User
- Sep 13, 2006
- 6,149
- 6,328
AngryMilkcrates
End of an Era
- Jun 4, 2016
- 17,495
- 28,224
Bruins are one of the better defensive teams in the NHL. We, however, are middle of the pack offensively. We just crested 3gpg for the first time this season recently due to the LA blowout.
I would like to see depth and size added on D, and we need a long term solution at C. But if there is dialogue between the two teams and interest both ways(there is no evidence of any ATM) then you get something done here. There is a place for Garland on the Bruins.
Habs Halifax
Loyal Habs Fan
I would not put a lot of faith in Reilly with McAvoy and that bottom pairing. I would say Grzelcyk/Carlo is solid and Bergeron shelters a lot of some of the other pairings.
If the Bruins want to go on a run, I would say a good LD to play with McAvoy and secondary scoring is both areas of need.
There are very few guys that I'd trade Podkolzin for. I'd put him in the Newhook, Boldy, B.Schneider tier that other teams have. He is quietly having an excellent season, and getting better each week. He won't score at the pace of some, but brings a whole lot to the table.
Bettman Returnz
Why so serious?
Yes, it’s highly unlikely we would move him. Would be an overpayment so can’t see anyone bucking up.
Stephen Gionta
Boston College > Boston University
There aren't 30 other teams taking the Dickinson contract off the hands of Rutherford who has stated that getting some cap space is one of his top priorities.
Bettman Returnz
Why so serious?
It doesn’t have to include Dickinson, is our point. Would it be nice to, yes… but not giving away any top picks so pass.
Last edited:
Sorry but happen to watch the games and if can tell me that Clifton and Reilly are going to handle the physical play of the playoffs , we are not watching the same games.......
AngryMilkcrates
End of an Era
- Jun 4, 2016
- 17,495
- 28,224
We have a difference of opinion, but not as much as you think.
I see the numbers support Bostons defense as 1st in shot suppression and dangerous shot suppression.
So our D is not nearly as terrible as people think.
However
I DO agree with you that I am not comfortable with how Reilly has been playing nor his ability to do well in a close playoff series.
Our point production on the back end has been a glaring need this year that most Bruins fans don't talk about.
Clifton has been good the past few years in the playoffs. He is a gamble same as Carlo for that matter.
Carlo has been Jekyll and Hyde all year.
I agree our needs are a long term solution at C, a short term upgrade this postseason to 2C, and some depth and muscle for the playoffs at D.
But we also need scoring on the backend we have NOT gotten all year long::COUGH::Reilly::COUGH:
and need middle six scoring.The last point sounds crazy with Pasta and Hall playing well together, but our Goals Per Game average this season is bellow that of years past.
Again, I think that is more on the D not chipping in as much as previous years(Gryz, Reilly)
I guess we can disagree on Garland. A good deal for him would give us some snarl and scoring touch to add to our top line.
I would love to see what Connor would do with Brad and Patrice.
if the goal is to shed salary, definitely not.
there are hardly 10 teams, who have the cap space to trade for garland without the need to send cap back.
Nona Di Giuseppe
Registered User
no. they need defensively capable forwards. which Garland is.
i don’t see Canucks trading garland for anything less than overpayment. buckets of 1sts and such
Many teams have prospects/young players that are off the table for trades, I 100% put Podkolzin in that from the Canucks POV.
Podkolzin won't produce points at the same level as many of the young guys out there, understood, but his all around game has been outstanding as a 20 YO in his first year of NA hockey. He is developing into a very unique and special player, and we are seeing improvements under BB nearly every game.
Nona Di Giuseppe
Registered User
It’s not that they hold the same value; it’s just teams don’t trade young developing prospects and Podzolkin is one of those. No GM wants to pull a Neely.
Just A Bit Outside
Playoffs??!
- Mar 6, 2010
- 17,696
- 17,407
Reverend Mayhem
Tell me all your thoughts on God
If you are managing a hockey team and don't have a chart like this, you should be fired on the spot IMO. Not exactly a high bar. I think teams have been doing this since expansion.
I loved the piece by SN done on it though lmao. I watched it and I was like "Cool. Everyone should have one. This is not interesting."
